Maybe they got to the dump and there was a big sign and chain across the dump saying “Closed on Thanksgiving” and they had never heard of a dump closed on Thanksgiving before and with tears in their eyes they drove off into the sunset looking for another place to put the garbage. They didn’t find one. ‘Til they came to a side road and off the side of the side road there was another fifteen foot cliff and at the bottom of the cliff was another pile of garbage. And they decided that one big pile is better than two little piles and rather than bring that one up they decided to throw theirs down.

Those are no longer considered canon, nor are they in the medium of a movie or show

Let’s get the Orb of Confusion effect played on the sphere

Refer to the first sentence of my comment.

This raises so many questions:

• How does frog mom know Heathcliff? Are they romantically involved? Is Heathcliff frog dad? Is Heathcliff frog sibling? Has frog mom kissed Heathcliff before?
• Is Heathcliff’s natural form cat or is he truly a frog?
• Magic exists?
• Will Heathcliff remain in frog form in the next comic? How will he return to cat form, if at all?
• Why would somebody name their cat “Gurch”?

That’s a good one! Would have fit well for the recent Tales of the Underworld short series.

There was a brief deleted scene of Luke putting the finishing touches on the saber (canon?), but there still would be questions left with what we know now of the need for kyber crystals and each design’s connection to their constructor.

Those don’t take place during the same time period. Andor is set during the construction of the Death Star 1. The “many Bothans” line involves the plans for the Death Star 2, which was 4 years after Rogue One and A New Hope.

That is shown and is an important part of the movie

AI chats are known for their overconfident persuasiveness, especially when incorrect. IIRC the job was pretty much just yapping that exact type of rhetoric.

Are you saying you think it’s ok to give a platform to content explicitly promoting genocide and Nazism so long as it has a beat?

Somebody posted this exact same comic to this community just prior. I don’t think your title is a reference to a small edit that I’m missing? In any case, it might be best for everyone to glance through New on a community before posting non-OC.

Virtually every sentient life experiences a non-zero amount of suffering. Progeny that doesn’t exist categorically doesn’t suffer; progeny that does exist is virtually certain to suffer to some degree. The hedonist argument that progeny may get to experience some joy falls apart because progeny that doesn’t exist categorically doesn’t experience any lack of joy (i.e. that would-be joy is not mourned by that which does not exist).

Ensuring the certainty of the sum total of suffering in another person’s life just for one’s own self-fulfillment is incredibly selfish. Procreation is a cycle of blithe selfishness that perpetuates universal suffering and is at best wrought by apathy for others’ suffering and at worst wrought by enthusiasm for others’ suffering.

I’m anti-kid because I didn’t consent to the sentience that I have experienced and I have the empathy to want others not to suffer.

If reincarnation were real, I’d hope that people who think the meaning of life entails procreation end up getting stuck as mayflies forever

I saw a job listing the other day for an “AI Advocate” (I don’t remember the specific job title). Basically the job was to promote the use of AI products to other companies. It got me thinking that their AI replacements for humans must not be very good if they need a human to promote them, otherwise the AI would be able to successfully sell itself.

Need a reporter to get in Trump or his press secretary’s face and call this action “woke DEI” and start chanting “They will not replace us”

I wonder how somebody can completely miss their own message like this. Or maybe somebody made an original image and then a techbro made this AI slop as a duplicate to spite them.

This doesn’t seem all that innovative to me.

It seems like the process for generation is:

1. Parse the input command and generate it as a 3D object (not yet in Lego form). There is already software that can do this.
2. Translate the 3D object into Lego form using strictly basic bricks. This technology has been around for a while. This video doesn’t show this process directly but it is used in jobs such as these.
3. Conduct a stability check. This is something that Lego specific software such as Stud.io already does.

I suppose it is the first case in which I’ve seen all of these steps come together?

There are also a couple of flaws that I see right away:

• The publication emphasizes how either a human or a robot arm can build the program’s output. However, they overlook the need for subassemblies in some assemblies. The render of the “high-backed chair” example cannot be built from the bottom up as shown in the article because there would be pieces floating in midair until another layer is added; you’d have to either build subassemblies or invert portions of the build, both of which the robot arms seem incapable of doing.
• You don’t seem able to set the scale of the build? You might want a build that is specifically 1:20 scale or 10 bricks long or 5 inches tall, for example.
• [EDIT: Because Lego bricks are not dimensioned as cubic units, the orientation of the bricks relative to the assembled model may impact how well the model “reads” as what it’s supposed to be. As in, having the topside of the individual bricks oriented 90° from the topside of the assembly (i.e., SNOT) may produce better looking results than if they were aligned. The program doesn’t seem to account for this.]
• The application of painted decoration forces that level of detail to remain digital, or for whomever is artistically disinclined enough to have a machine make a rudimentary Lego build for them to somehow be artistically inclined enough to paint that level of detail.
• Omitting the painted decorations, the program doesn’t seem to consider what parts actually exist in which colors; this is also something that Stud.io can do. Similarly, it would be helpful to curate the parts used based on their cost to acquire.
• The use of only basic bricks is very limiting. This isn’t a major critique since those types of builds do have their uses.

Lastly, it seems like this is just another case of using ”AI” to supplant where humans can find fun and expression in this world, instead of reducing labor. I say this since the program seems targeted toward small scale commercial use, in contrast to the large industrial usage in the video I linked to above.

If there is something about this program that I missed or misunderstood, please clarify for me.

[EDIT: I found a paper with more information. I’ll have to read through it later.]

Somebody should really report these MAGA people for their anti-Christian biases

I would think the underground ones that host content which is horribly abusive and illegal (in ways beyond merely piracy)

El Salvador and Libya are definitely the easiest